Efficient Algorithms for Semirandom Planted CSPs at the Refutation Threshold

September 28, 2023 ยท The Ethereal ยท ๐Ÿ› IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science

๐Ÿ”ฎ THE ETHEREAL: The Ethereal
Pure theory โ€” exists on a plane beyond code

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Venkatesan Guruswami, Jun-Ting Hsieh, Pravesh K. Kothari, Peter Manohar arXiv ID 2309.16897 Category cs.CC: Computational Complexity Cross-listed cs.DS Citations 6 Venue IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science Last Checked 1 month ago
Abstract
We present an efficient algorithm to solve semirandom planted instances of any Boolean constraint satisfaction problem (CSP). The semirandom model is a hybrid between worst-case and average-case input models, where the input is generated by (1) choosing an arbitrary planted assignment $x^*$, (2) choosing an arbitrary clause structure, and (3) choosing literal negations for each clause from an arbitrary distribution "shifted by $x^*$" so that $x^*$ satisfies each constraint. For an $n$ variable semirandom planted instance of a $k$-arity CSP, our algorithm runs in polynomial time and outputs an assignment that satisfies all but a $o(1)$-fraction of constraints, provided that the instance has at least $\tilde{O}(n^{k/2})$ constraints. This matches, up to $polylog(n)$ factors, the clause threshold for algorithms that solve fully random planted CSPs [FPV15], as well as algorithms that refute random and semirandom CSPs [AOW15, AGK21]. Our result shows that despite having worst-case clause structure, the randomness in the literal patterns makes semirandom planted CSPs significantly easier than worst-case, where analogous results require $O(n^k)$ constraints [AKK95, FLP16]. Perhaps surprisingly, our algorithm follows a significantly different conceptual framework when compared to the recent resolution of semirandom CSP refutation. This turns out to be inherent and, at a technical level, can be attributed to the need for relative spectral approximation of certain random matrices - reminiscent of the classical spectral sparsification - which ensures that an SDP can certify the uniqueness of the planted assignment. In contrast, in the refutation setting, it suffices to obtain a weaker guarantee of absolute upper bounds on the spectral norm of related matrices.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Computational Complexity